addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Global Challenge Game - Last of 3

  • Nov 25, 2012 · 9:00 AM
  • This location is shown only to members

K guys, 

Well Andrew has beaten Kyle and I in the 2 challenge games thus far (i.e. Revised and AA50).  Though the dice gods were responsible for the AA50 fiasco.

Anyways,  we have decided to do the Global challenge game on this date.  Stu will be Andrew's partner in this grueling match-up.  We decided to bid for the allies and the Andrew/Stu team won it with a bid of 8.  The initial setup will remain the same, the cash will simply we added to the coffers of an allied country or several depending on their preference.

There will be a 12 hour time limit on this game.  As in previous games, we will appoint a time marshall.  If we average one turn an hour we can get in 12 rounds, but I would like to see at least 10.  I will also have this set up in my garage so we can leave it and come back to it at a later date if we want, which I fully expect may be the case.

Here goes nothing.

Join or login to comment.

  • Erik S

    Lol, and attack is still a better game. Imho

    November 28, 2012

  • Kyle E.

    I swear you sneak attack another player (Erik) in Africa for one game of Attack and two years later he's still calling you names.

    November 28, 2012

  • D.K.Maclaren

    For the record, I conscider Andrew, Travis and Kyle to be the best players aof Axis and Allies that I have ever met. The hrs they put into developing strategies and plans definitely pay off in their gameplay. Much respect to their dedication to this excellent game!

    November 27, 2012

  • Travis W.

    I wish I had taken a picture of that UK turn 1 move.

    November 27, 2012

  • Travis W.

    It was epic in so many ways.

    November 27, 2012

  • Erik S

    Kyle: "Travis/Andrew i want to learn the ways of the force and become a Jedi like you guys" " Andrew/Travis: You must travel to Dagoba and seek out the jedi master Yoda, who is evern better at AA then we are,but is less prone to over analyzing the game after the fact". Kyle " oh thank you master(s), i will, i will" ( runs off happilly) Andrew/Travis (off screen) "What a putz".

    November 27, 2012

  • D.K.Maclaren

    LOL! Andrew, you never fail to bring a smile to my face. Thank you!

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    One last thought - I do find this an interesting game and especially with realizing how important the Pacific is; actually more important than capturing or holding Russia depending on which side you are playing. I think this is a very unique game but frankly is just far too long of a game to play from where I am.

    Japan cannot focus on Russia or the US will eventually out build it and control the Pacific so that means the Japanese will not put as much pressure on China, India and Russia as in previous games. Germany can not allow their Italian friends to get emasculated so buying more air power and using it to destroy the UK Med fleet is a necessity but that weakens Germany's attack on Russia. I see Germany playing more defensively against Russia and instead helping Italy to go for Africa. Once Africa is under Axis control with a very weakened UK the Germans and Italians turn on Russia and take them out while Japan plays to a draw in the Pacific.

    Africa it seems is the key.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    All that is sure is the Germans/Italians certainly had a chance to take Egypt and could have won the game so it did not matter that the Allies would eventually control the Pacific.

    The only thing that was clear was the Axis still had a chance to win and so did the Allies and it would take at least one more if not two more sessions to determine the actual game winner and that was not something any of us wanted to do so Stoob and I conceded because frankly since we failed in our goal of being a clear winner we had lost the challenge as far as I was concerned.

    Thank you again Travis, Kyle and Stoob for playing it was a lot of fun.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    However these errors by the Allies did result in Travis and Kyle not agreeing that the Allies had a clear win, as shown by Travis’ 65-35 declaration, and thus added to the fact why we conceded. In addition there was no reason to think the Axis would not win via capturing Egypt. Germany would have knocked the Allies out of Normandy with or without the UK placement, which was correctly denied once discovered, and then could have built planes over two turns and then either destroyed or forced the UK fleet sitting in 97 out of that position of convoy disruption. Then Germany could have bought a minor factory in Yugoslavia and build 3 carriers there, and perhaps one from Italy and landed 8 planes on them. That would have been a force too large for the UK fleet to attack. Or maybe the Germans would have built a massive fleet and sailed from the Baltic to the Med. There is no way of knowing.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    However that does not mean the Axis would lose for sure. Thanks to the eventual fall of Russia all the Axis had to do was to take Egypt and they would win with a European victory city victory. Thanks to a counting blunder by me the Russians lost 16 units to 8 for the Germans in Novgorad over two turns which gave Germany an advantage against Russia and so instead of holding firm Russia had to allow Germany more access to money then we had hoped. However thanks to the Pacific issue that was not a game losing mistake BUT it was a weakening of a clear win by the end of the day. In fact Stoob’s error of not placing his UK Buy also was not a game losing issue. In fact since it had become clear by then that thanks to the Pacific the Allies did not need to hold Normandy or Russia, all that mattered was Egypt, we could have redirected that money to Egypt to hold there.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    That is why the Pacific was doomed for the Axis and the fall of Russia was not going to matter as far as a money game was concerned. Also for Russia to fall Japan was going to have to attack it so these best case numbers for Japan were not going to happen as they were going to have to spend money on land units to go after Russia. Frankly the Pacific was going to go Allied and the Axis could not stop it.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    However the Japanese did not buy for an immediate Australian attack and instead went for the islands and their money and it was not till Turn 6 they made a play for Australia and by then it was too late.

    In fact that is why the Allies should have eventually won because the US was building naval units while the Japanese were building factories and land units. Over 3 Turns the US and ANZAC built 34 naval/air units while the Japanese built 6. When we conceded this gave the US/ANZAC 48/6=54 units versus 26 for the Japanese. Even if the Japanese had done a full carrier buy (4) and subs they would have added just 18 more units to the Pacific while the US/ANZAC could have added 11 more so it would have been 44 Japanese units versus 65 Allied units. In addition the US had 21 more units in the English Channel that could have been in Hawaii in 4 Turns giving the Allies a minimum of a 40 unit advantage.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    As far as the game goes both sides played poorly; it was not much of a challenge game.

    The Allies had a clear advantage in Europe at the end of Turn 1 thanks to a very good UK strategy and an aggressive G1 that did into turn out the way the Axis wanted. However the Allies threw away that advantage in the Pacific by forgetting that they HAD to keep Yunnan out of Japanese control or the Japanese could land all of their planes there which they did on Turn 2 and Stoob and I both had a brain fart and did not see that India was doomed on Turn 3. The Axis SHOULD have won the game for sure on Turn 3 when they captured India but they then made the game even again when they did not follow up that substantial victory. If the Axis had bought on Turn 3 assuming they would capture India and moved against Australia immediately it would have fallen by Turn 5 or 6. There was nothing the Allies could have done to prevent it.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    Travis – I am going to quibble with you a bit on the percentages but not with the overall decision. Stoob and I had decided our goal was to have a clear win by the end of the day as we did not want to play multiple sessions. That certainly was not the case. That is why we conceded. I think IF the Allies could have played error free the rest of the game we had an 80% chance of winning. Since we had shown no ability to do that I think it was more likely 50-50. Either side could have won. The point being without a clear decision Stoob and I failed in our goal and thus conceded. While I do not think we actually lost the game we certainly lost the challenge which is what this is all about. Kyle and Travis won the challenge match. Period.

    November 27, 2012

  • Andrew

    Kyle - Thanks to the $8 bid we were going to build an airfield on Gibraltar and fly three UK fighters there to protect the UK fleet on Turn 1 from an German air attack. This still left Sealion at 23% which we figured you would not attempt.

    However since Germany lost 4 fighters on Turn 1 and the UK BB survived we did not need to spend that money and instead bought a fighter and infantry. In retrospect I think we should have bought two subs and an infantry.

    November 27, 2012

  • Travis W.

    We called it with both sides agreeing the chances were 65/35 with kyle and I in the lead. India fell on turn 3 which was huge and germany killed lots of russians when it took novgrod and only lost 4 units. That was also huge. Then england forgot to place his buy so they were 10 units down in normandy which ended the game in our favor. Keep in mind andrews strategy only works if everything works flawlessly. That did not happen throughout the game.

    November 27, 2012

  • Kyle E.

    I just want to reiterate how brilliantly Andrew and Stu took out Italy in the first moves of the game. What's hilarious to me is that move was referred to as Plan 2.0 which I inferred was really Plan B or possibly Plan A with subtle changes. If that wasn't your go to move guys then what was?

    November 26, 2012

  • Erik S

    So, Andrew did not really loose then?

    November 26, 2012

  • Andrew

    For those who did not see our game let me point out that when Stoob and I conceded the Pacific was NOT in Allied hands NOR was Russia under Axis control. It was agreed by both sides that due to force ratios at that time Russia would eventually fall, the Allies would be kicked out of Normandy and the US would eventually take over the Pacific due to a large force advantage, 2 to 1, in shipping at the time we conceded.

    What was unclear was if by the time Russia fell and the US gained superiority of the Pacific would the Axis have been able to take Egypt and thus gain a victory city victory before the Allies could gain economic domination and basically stall any possible hope of an Axis victory and then slowly but inevitably win. It would have taken 20-30 Turns to find that out and frankly it was not worth it to any of us. Very interesting though. :)

    Thanks again for the game guys!!!

    BTW I do not see how this game can be played in person unless people live near each other.

    November 26, 2012

  • Andrew

    Continued... Of course in TripleA you are guaranteed a $2 loss per roll where that is an average for the real game so I do not think a total $55 loss each Turn is fair. However even at just 60%, which is low in my opinion, you are looking at a loss of $33 or $146 Allies vs $132 Axis. This DOES NOT take into account the US landings in Russia via Alaska and/or any trading the UK or US are doing on any land mass areas via amphibious assault. This is easy to do with control of the ocean and easily could add another 20-30 for the Allies.

    So I would state again that if Japan loses control over the Pacific, as they did in our game, then even if Russia falls the Allies will win as long as they maintain control over Africa.

    This I think dramatically effects the Allied strategy knowing it is more important to throw resources into the Pacific than to help save Russia and greatly effects Japanese strategy as they cannot focus on China, India and Russia and ignore US shipping.

    Cool.

    November 26, 2012

  • Andrew

    I ran the numbers based on the US taking over the Pacific and Japan capturing Russia. They were as I remembered them which is quite astounding. I assumed the Axis captured ALL the land mass except for the continent of Africa; Europe, Russia, Asia, China and the Middle East including Norway too. I also assumed that it was Japan, and not Germany, taking Russia and the oil fields of the middle east. This denies Germany $19 in NO's but based on game play is reasonable. It is Japan that would have captured those areas. So the Allies control nothing on the main land mass. However they control Africa and all island territories and they conduct convoy disruption.

    US = 92
    UK = 39
    ANZAC = 15
    Total = 146

    Germany = 66
    Japan = 86
    Italy = 13
    Total = 165

    However now add in convoy disruption and the potential monies change to:

    Germany = 61
    Japan = 49
    Italy = 0
    Total = 110

    Potential convoy disruption is $55.

    November 26, 2012

  • Andrew

    Thank you for the game! I enjoyed playing with you guys.

    Stoob and I intended to have a clear win before the end of the night and had come up with what we thought was a pretty slick strategy. Unfortunately after 3 major tactical errors it was clear the Allies could not claim a clear win and because of a long term strategic error by the Axis they could not declare a certain win either. The game could have gone on for a very long time and we happily conceded to avoid a 20-30 Turn game.

    I think the Axis would have captured Russia within 5-7 Turns and by then the US would have had control of the Pacific so the game would have come down to Germany's ability to free up Italy to fight for Egypt. I would say it was anyone's game but it would have taken waaaaaaaaaay to long to get a certain winner and since Kyle and Travis made no tactical errors they deserved the win.

    Thank you Stuart for being a great partner and thank you Kyle and Travis for being such friendly competitors.

    November 26, 2012

  • Erik S

    Good job.

    November 26, 2012

  • Kyle E.

    First of all big thanks to Stoob and especially Andrew for making the trip to play the game. Travis and I claim victory although it was far from over. Neither party wanted to play it out to 30 turns over three weekends to take it to a conclusion. The game started out with perhaps the most brilliant turn 1 move I have ever seen in a board game. Kudos to whoever cooked up the UK turn 1 move against Italy it was pretty much perfect and has me now wondering who really has the upper hand in this game between the axis and the allies. Do not share it with anyone please.

    November 25, 2012

  • Travis W.

    Kyle and I did.

    November 25, 2012

  • Erik S

    Who won?

    November 25, 2012

  • Stoobert

    our family had thanksgiving on saturday, so our leftovers are fresher than most. if you aren't sick of turkey and stuffing already, let me know and i will bring some. i'll check my email in the morning. see you soon!

    November 24, 2012

  • Geoff

    Just have everybody bring their thanksgiving left overs. We all know we have too much.

    November 24, 2012

  • Kyle E.

    Hey guys can't wait. Just to let Stu and Andrew know there will be refreshments there (veggie platter and what not). Although I am not certain what the plan is for more hardier food later on when we need it but we will figure it out if Travis has not already. War!

    1 · November 24, 2012

  • Geoff

    As much as I want to visit, be a cheer leader and dink some of Travis's bear I can't. Travel day from visiting my parents in gig harbor.

    November 17, 2012

  • jason

    sorry i was mildly confused being fresh out of surgery and hopped up on dope.

    October 19, 2012

  • Geoff

    I think the description Travis left was pretty specific, but this can be confusing to new players like Jason who don't know these challenge games exist. I like the idea of listing the game and who is playing but not leaving spots for people to RSVP. Game description lets people know who's playing but still allows alto place comments for discussion purposes.

    October 17, 2012

  • D.K.Maclaren

    sorry about the confusion Jason, get well quick.

    October 17, 2012

  • D.K.Maclaren

    Also, when setting up the challenge game, it allows the organizer to "edit RSVPs". at which time you can just RSVP for all the intended attendees.

    October 17, 2012

  • D.K.Maclaren

    I cant see any way of doing that Geoff. We just have to be very specific in the description when we post challenge game to say who the players will be or not even post it on the site and just email each other to set it up. I will leave that to the Challengees.

    October 17, 2012

  • Geoff

    I wonder for future challenge games if meetup will allow us to post the game and the attendees, rather than leaving it open for people to signup who is not part of the challenge game. Less confusion

    October 16, 2012

  • Travis W.

    No. Again this was a challenge game. Andrew issued a challenge to kyle and myself and we accepted.

    October 15, 2012

  • jason

    I am very good at axis too.how come i got the boot and will this happen again to me?

    October 15, 2012

  • Travis W.

    Yeh, this game was dicussed back in like january. Will host one for everyone in dec.

    October 15, 2012

  • jason

    So now i am out?i was looking very forward to playing.

    October 15, 2012

  • Travis W.

    Global dennis, worldwide, big board mayhem!

    October 12, 2012

  • Kyle E.

    Football Sundays are the holiest of days of course. I myself will be sacrificing the viewing of my beloved Seahawks. I'm sure Andrew and Stu will bring along their own radio just to distract me.

    BTW am I the time cop for this game or are we just going to hot potato the stop watch from team to team?

    October 11, 2012

  • Geoff

    This a challenge game, not an open game. Kyle and Travis vrs Andrew and Stu. I may or may not show up to root you on and partake in the adult beverages, per Travis's invite. Depends on my beloved Bears. It is a football Sunday. ;)

    October 11, 2012

  • Erik S

    Work Sundays.

    October 10, 2012

  • Travis W.

    Will change it.

    October 10, 2012

  • Andrew

    I thought we were playing Sunday?

    October 10, 2012

  • Andrew

    That is great that we can leave the game up if necessary though Stu and I expect to have a clear win by Turn 12. :)

    October 10, 2012

4 went

Our Sponsors

  • Guardian Games

    Guardian Games supports our group and has ample space for a war.

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy